WASHINGTON — The phone at the Women’s Ordination Conference (WOC) office rang off the hook for days after Pope Francis reportedly said he would consider studying the question of women deacons.

“We’ve heard from [former] members who haven’t been members in a long time,” said Erin Saiz Hanna, co-executive director of the group, which wants to see women ordained as Catholic priests, deacons and bishops. “There is an incredible amount of energy about this possibility.”

Despite the excitement generated in some quarters by media reports of the Holy Father’s May 12 comments to members of the International Union of Superiors General (UISG), it seems unlikely that further study of the diaconate would lead to ordaining women as priests or even deacons (see related coverage).

The day after news reports reverberated with the enthusiasm voiced by the WOC’s Saiz Hanna, Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Holy See Press Office, told the Italian news service La Stampa, “The Pope says he is thinking of establishing a commission that can look into these questions, offering a clearer picture. But let us be honest: The Pope did not say he intends to introduce the ordination of women deacons; much less so did he talk about ordaining female priests.”

Even the WOC, though encouraged by Pope Francis’ openness to talk about women deacons, acknowledged that the Holy Father already has restated the Church’s position about not ordaining women as priests. Nonetheless, Saiz Hanna said, “We see a willingness to dialogue more with Francis. There is an openness to be able to talk about things.”

Sister Carmen Sammut, a Missionary Sister of Our Lady of Africa and USIG president, said the question posed to the Pope about a study of women deacons was one of several that came from delegates to the group’s plenary assembly. She said members were surprised by media reaction, which she said dealt solely with the deacon question and “sometimes distorted both the question and the answer.”

Her hope, she said, is that a new study of women deacons requested by her group and done by those who understand the needs of a Church with a shortage of priests could lead to a fruitful conclusion.

It is unclear, however, what further study would accomplish, given much has been done already. A significant and extensive treatment of the topic was published by the International Theological Commission in 2002, which said deaconesses in the tradition of the ancient Church, who are often cited by advocates of a contemporary female diaconate, were not equivalent to deacons.

“That document was really thorough,” said Chad Pecknold, associate professor of historical and systematic theology at The Catholic University of America. “It’s hard to imagine that they’re going to find out anything more.”

Pecknold said although some have seen the study as giving ambiguous advice, he thinks it went through the biblical, historical, doctrinal and liturgical evidence systematically and reached clear, though cautious, conclusions.

Catherine Tkacz, research professor of theology at the Ukrainian Catholic University in Lviv and a scholar on women in the Church, agreed, saying the report is “clear and careful, marshaling a wealth of historical evidence and scholarship and assessing it accurately.”

Tkacz explained that the ancient institution of deaconesses was centered on the reception of baptism and the Eucharist by female members. At women’s baptisms, which took place in the nude, deaconesses could instruct and anoint, to protect the modesty of the candidates. They also gave the Eucharist to housebound women because it would have been scandalous in those times for a male priest or deacon to enter a woman’s home. However, Tkacz said, “The deaconess was never a ‘female deacon’ or ‘woman deacon’ with the liturgical roles of a deacon.”

Furthermore, the rite for commissioning those who took the Eucharist to the housebound differs significantly from the rite for ordaining deacons.

For example, she said, a deaconess was not vested in an alb, nor did she kneel before the bishop, as the male deacon did. The bishop placed his hands on the deaconess candidate’s head and prayed two prayers, but they were not the same as those for the deacon. The prayers also referred to the candidate’s role in “ministry,” but did not call her a deaconess; and she received a diaconal stole, but not a liturgical fan, which was used when the deacon stood by the altar at the consecration.

Such acts, Tkacz said, indicated that the deaconess had no liturgical role.

The deaconess then received and placed a chalice back on the altar, signifying that she would not be distributing the Eucharist at the liturgy, but only taking it to housebound women; the deacon, by contrast, received the chalice and then went forth to give Communion to the faithful.

Tkacz said some scholars insist that the rites and roles of deacons and deaconesses were the same.

“They claim that, for the Church today to ordain women as deacons, that would ‘restore’ past practice, which is false.”

Furthermore, she said, the cultural context in which deaconesses served has changed so that most Catholics are baptized as infants, and it is not considered scandalous for a priest to take the Eucharist to a woman in her home: “To begin now to ordain women as deacons would not be a ‘restoration,’ but a radical innovation.”

Tkacz believes the ultimate goal in claiming it would be a restoration is the ordination of women as priests, a notion that she said is not sacramental, but egalitarian.

Indeed, Saiz Hanna, whose group applauded the USIG for posing the question about women deacons to Pope Francis, said, for her and advocates of women’s ordination, it’s all about God having created men and women equal.

“We feel that it’s limiting God to say that God can’t work through women,” she said. “We know there are women who are called to be priests. That call is stronger than anything else, and that call is denied — so it still comes down to equality.”

Dominican Father Giles Dimock, who holds a licentiate in liturgy and teaches novices at St. Gertrude Priory in Cincinnati, said advocates of women’s ordination have sometimes used the slogan, “Don’t baptize me if you’re not going to ordain me.” But he said this reflects a misunderstanding of the Church. “There are many different roles in the mystical body, and all complement and need one another,” he said. “This whole notion of complementarity needs to be rediscovered.”

That said, Father Dimock added, it may be valid to explore new modes of service that are particularly germane to women, without necessarily restoring deaconesses in the Church. Even if the role of the deaconess were revived, he said, it would not be the same as that of a male deacon. “And I guess there’s the problem. What would it mean?”

The UISG’s Sister Carmen said although media reports focused on the question to Pope Francis about women deacons, the group also asked him about the absence of women from the decision-making processes of the Church.

“He was very strong about the fact that women should be in the decision-making processes and the decision-making positions of the Church and that this should not be linked solely with priesthood or sacramental status,” she said in a video statement.

Pope Francis, she added, spoke about the dangers of both feminism and clericalism, telling the sisters they should not want certain positions just because they are women and saying that being a priest or bishop does not give someone an exclusive right to make decisions. That right, she said the Pope told the sisters, comes from baptism, so that all baptized Catholics should be involved in decision-making at the parish and higher levels.

Catholic University’s Pecknold said he, too, noted the Holy Father’s references to clericalism in his audience with the UISG. “It’s one of the least reported and indicates his own mind on the question.”

Pecknold said in reviewing what Pope Francis had said before news reports about the audience emerged, “I read that the Pope was very gently indicating that he has no intention of ordaining women to the permanent diaconate. In fact, what he really confirmed was … that women and laymen should not ask to be clericalized.”

“What I heard in Pope Francis’ words was [his intention of] reminding them that their dignity is actually great in itself, and they shouldn’t ask to be clericalized, because that view of priestly vocation, diaconal vocation misunderstands the distinctions between orders and states,” he said. “The dignity inherent in service to the Church is always by virtue of our baptism. We’re not going to gain some greater dignity from serving in an office other than what we’re called to.”

Sister Carmen added: “Religious do not want to become deacons to have an honorific title. We don’t need that. We want to be enabled to give better service to the people of God to whom we belong.”

Nonetheless, there is some concern that even by raising the question and studying it further, advocates of ordaining women as deacons and priests could seize the discussion and use it to further their own agendas, as they have done with the Pope’s May 12 response.

In the Anglican Church, Pecknold said, arguments for women deacons led to the ordination of women priests.

However, Sister Carmen said she does not see discussions about women deacons as a path to priesthood for women. “I think ordination to the priesthood is another discussion, and the Pope has already spoken about it.”

The fact is this whole issue of care for the poor, the sick etc as lacking due to the emphasis on abortion is a fake narrative anyway. Maybe I’m an anomaly but the many Churches I’ve attended since I became Catholic the special collections etc far more often benefit those issues which supposedly are ignored by pro life Catholics. I think actually that it is pro life issues that are underrepresented as opposed to the other issues but like an earlier poster wrote we all have our special calling, just because one is pro life does not mean that’s all we care about and to suggest it is is just wrong. musee d orsay tour

Posted by John Smith on Wednesday, Mar, 28, 2018 7:47 AM (EDT):

It’s also very interesting that studies have shown that fathers play a larger role in passing down their religion to their children.

I strongly believe that God designed us so that Fathers (Men) are in charge of the Spiritual Health of their children (and others), Mothers (Women) are in charge of the Physical Health of their children (and others), and both together are in charge of the Mental Health of their children (and others).wood fired pizza catering near me

@ Phil19034 - Patriarchy is an artificial culture, not essential for the Catholic faith.

Posted by Taylor Shaw on Saturday, Sep, 9, 2017 6:46 AM (EDT):

Happy to see the blog doing well so far. It offers a place to be for people like me to talk and share experiences and thoughts. The site has been offering a lot of content regarding worship and religious thoughts which should be understood by the believers. https://meritotreatment.com/treatment-elements/

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Wednesday, Aug, 3, 2016 7:54 PM (EDT):

I am mystified that so many brothers and sisters feel threatened by the prospect of having women ordained. As for me, I pray for the day when we hear the senior cardinal deacon cry, “Habemus Mamam.” :-)

Posted by Kurt on Wednesday, Aug, 3, 2016 6:18 PM (EDT):

Phil—asking what they would “do” is the clericalism the Pope has warned us against. If once again women are given the diaconal charism, then they will have the support of that charism as they serve the People of God.

I’m glad you didn’t buy the spin that was being pushed by some that the “liberal media” was misreporting the Pope’s words.

Posted by Phil19034 on Wednesday, Aug, 3, 2016 5:58 PM (EDT):

@Luis - Jesus is God. If He wanted female priests and bishops he would have selected some to be the 12. But He did not. Jesus was NOT afraid to buck social norms. So the argument that He didn’t select women because of the time is 100% baloney. Jesus was NOT limited by the opinions of society.

God being God also knew we could be having this discussion. So if He wanted female priests, He would have selected a female to be an Apostle. The fact that He did not is VERY telling.

It’s also very interesting that studies have shown that fathers play a larger role in passing down their religion to their children.

I strongly believe that God designed us so that Fathers (Men) are in charge of the Spiritual Health of their children (and others), Mothers (Women) are in charge of the Physical Health of their children (and others), and both together are in charge of the Mental Health of their children (and others).

Point is, Jesus selected all men for a REASON, and that reason was NOT because of social norms.

God Bless

Posted by Phil19034 on Wednesday, Aug, 3, 2016 5:33 PM (EDT):

Kurt - I 100% believed that Pope Francis was going to create a commission because he said he would.

However, I don’t believe anything will come out of this. Women cannot receive the Sacrament of Holy Orders to become a Deacon. And even though the office of Deaconess used to exist and could be brought back, what would they do?

“...But it is not lawful for any one of the other clergy to do the work of a deacon. A deaconess does not bless, nor perform anything belonging to the office of presbyters or deacons, but only is to keep the doors, and to minister to the presbyters in the baptizing of women, on account of decency. A deacon separates a sub-deacon, a reader, a singer, and a deaconess, if there be any occasion, in the absence of a presbyter. It is not lawful for a sub-deacon to separate either one of the clergy or laity; nor for a reader, nor for a singer, nor for a deaconess, for they are the ministers to the deacons.”

Deaconesses helped with baptizing women when they used to baptize in the nude.

I honestly have no idea what a Deaconesses would do today.

Posted by Kurt on Wednesday, Aug, 3, 2016 2:31 PM (EDT):

We were told that the “liberal Media” was spinning this and the Pope had no intention of appointing a commission. Boy, were they wrong.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Wednesday, Aug, 3, 2016 1:21 PM (EDT):

Response to Abby—Hope this is not another exercise in window dressing. Let us pray…

Posted by Abby on Wednesday, Aug, 3, 2016 1:09 PM (EDT):

@Luis - My “crystal ball” tells me there will be no change but if there were to be a change it would be title only which will not be the equivalent of an ordained Deacon. We’ll see in a few years :)

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Wednesday, Aug, 3, 2016 12:21 PM (EDT):

Response to Abby—“Nothing new will come from this study.” How do you know? My crystal ball tells me that something new may come out of it, albeit in perfect continuity with apostolic tradition. Radical patriarchalism is as harmful as radical feminism. The faith is always the same, yet the source of ever new light. Prayers!

Posted by Abby on Wednesday, Aug, 3, 2016 10:14 AM (EDT):

A study has already been conducted and the conclusions were that the Deaconess in the early Church was not ordained. Their role did not mirror what the ordained Deacon in the Church does today.

This is just an attempt by radical feminists to dredge up the same complaint about ordaining women and the Holy Father’s attempt to “give them a voice.” Nothing new will come from this study.

Furthermore, Jesus was not bound by any limits then or now. He is God!

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, Aug, 2, 2016 10:15 PM (EDT):

Response to Tim—Peace be with you!

Posted by Tim on Tuesday, Aug, 2, 2016 10:08 PM (EDT):

My dear friend Luis
Women will never be Priest. Once again Jesus called men to be priests not women.if you think that women should be Priest, you might want to consider one the many other fake Religions that embrace this stuff.

This is my final response for I believe in the solid truth of the Catholic Church not truth that is relative,depending how I feel

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, Aug, 2, 2016 9:48 PM (EDT):

Response to Tim—My dear friend, if you want to remain attached to the era of patriarchal gender theory, fine with me. I would not even try to convince you, but may I share my reasons for hoping that the Church will outgrow this mentality.
*
Patriarchal gender theory (i.e., the sex/gender “binary”) reduces the human person to a sexual object. The conflation of patriarchal gender ideology and revealed truth in our sacramental theology is detrimental to the glory of God and the good of souls, and must be clarified. This is the most critical issue facing the Church today.
*
My hopes are based on my understanding of St. John Paul II’s Theology of the Body and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Across the entire sex/gender spectrum, the essence of human personhood is to be a body-soul unity. Families are already evolving from sole male (father) headship to joint male-female (father-mother) headship. To continue the process narrated in Acts 15, when the Church transitioned out of the patriarchal Jewish culture, now the Church must let go of the simplistic sex/gender binary.
*
This process of prayerful discernment must continue. The Church is “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic” (and therefore hierarchical) but not essentially patriarchal. None of the sacraments should exclude any human person due to gender identity. All church ministries, ordained and unordained, must be gift-based, not gender-based. The body is a sacrament of the entire person but is not the entire personal subject. When a priest consecrates the bread and wine, he or she is acting in the person of Christ as a divine personal subject, not just as a human being with a male body.
*
The exclusively male priesthood is an artificial contraceptive (if not an abortifacient!) of female priestly vocations. Ancient religious patriarchy is now becoming an obstacle to grace and a very grave impediment to fostering the reign of God and a sensible evolution toward an integral human ecology.

Posted by Tim on Tuesday, Aug, 2, 2016 9:29 PM (EDT):

Once again as I stated above,women should never be Priests or Deanons. I stand by my statement. TheTruth is the truth.
Jesus made men Priests not women.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, Aug, 2, 2016 9:21 PM (EDT):

Response to Tim—I know what the Church has taught in the past and teaches in the present. There is *NOTHING* dogmatic that precludes the Church from enhancing that teaching in the future by understanding that women can and should be ordained to the diaconate, the priesthood, and the episcopate. Ours is a living tradition, not one that is fossilized in the ancient past. Compare the current Catechism of the Catholic Church (John Paul II, 1994) with older catechisms. The faith is always the same yet the source of ever new light.

Posted by Tim on Tuesday, Aug, 2, 2016 9:08 PM (EDT):

Men should continue to be Deacons and Priests, Women should continue to be Religious Sisters.
If women want to be Priests and Deacons they should go to one of the other
Religions that allow women too be Priests and Deacons. They even allow two women and to men to be married.,abortion and lots if other immoral stuff, that the Catholic teaches against.
The Catholic Church is the Church started by Jesus as Peter as the rock.Read and study what the Catholic Church teaches.
I love my Catholic faith,and it’s moral foundation.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, Aug, 2, 2016 8:41 PM (EDT):

Response to mg—This is not about what women want, or what men want. This is about discerning Christ’s will for the Church today. When Jesus chose the 12 male apostles to represent the patriarchs of the 12 tribes of Israel, he was acting within the *self-imposed* limits of his mission to the people of Israel and was *not* prescribing that only males could follow in apostolic succession after Pentecost. He gave the Chuch the power of the keys to make all decisions required to foster the reign of God and the good of souls. Would Jesus, in today’s global Church, choose only males to represent the patriarchs of the tribes of Israel?

Posted by mg on Tuesday, Aug, 2, 2016 8:27 PM (EDT):

Well, here we go again . . . to women who wish to be Ordained . . . be true to your conscience and become a member of the Protestant tradition, study whatever number of years that Tradition requires and become a Protestant Priest/Minister/Reverend . . . be happy and be respectful of the Catholic Church’s Tradition. Submitted by a woman.

Posted by lyle on Sunday, Jun, 26, 2016 7:12 AM (EDT):

Chivalry, the Marvel of Martial valor, to fight the Just War to protect the women and children from, Barbarians.

Today the United States murders the women and children of Yemen by starvation and cluster bombs, made in the USA. An act of Barbarianism in the worst mass murder of humans in all of world history, and women in the US as barbarians are excited and glad to do the job. If we lived a just world today, the leaders of the United States would be on trial for murder, but we don’t not live in a just world today. An acceptance to women as barbarians, in the murder of the poor, women and children, is praised. Sure women should be deacons in the US, its only natural, in a society of barbarians that praise the murder of the poor.

Posted by lyle on Monday, Jun, 20, 2016 7:19 AM (EDT):

First the trading of humans as slaves is greater in the USA than ever before in history. The United States murder of the poor is worse than ever in world history in the murder of near all in the country of Yemen.
The United States leadership if we lived in a just world, would be on trial for murder of the poorest of the poor, but we live in an unjust world.
To the issue of women, war is direct murder of others, defiant to thou shall not kill, directly, in the educated world. The US sends its poor off to murder others, in corrupt wars of the rich on the poor, and now, its sends its women.
If you don’t recognize that as wrong, for a civilization to murder others, based on a bigotry, of hate and revenge, and to send its women to do it, your stupidity and ignorance is your plead before God to save you.

Real Men, have reverence toward God, and Women. God didn’t send his daughter to Earth to drag a cross down the street, crucified for standing against evil was his crime. Mary, was Jesus Mother, the Islamic mention and refer to more than the Bible does. The Islamic have reverence, for Women and Mary, the US sends them off to murder the poor. think about
that.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Friday, Jun, 10, 2016 7:36 AM (EDT):

Response to Celeste - Peace be with you!

Posted by Celeste on Friday, Jun, 10, 2016 1:49 AM (EDT):

To Gutierrez: There have been many sinners in the Church including me. Yes, we should learn from past mistakes. But one thing we are sure about is that the Church never condones evil although many people mistakenly believe that it have done that.

For example, certainly there were Catholics who were engaged in the selling of slaves. But already in 15th century a pope (don’t know the name) declared an automatic excommunication of people who were engaged in this evil.

I prayed for you and will continue to do. Please pray for me, too. I need a lot of prayers.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 9:52 PM (EDT):

Response to Celeste - I am familiar with the argument, and readily agree. It is not a “change.” It is a “deepening,” a “re-formulation” of the doctrine originally formulated in “Unam Sanctam” (Boniface VIII, 1302):
*http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Bon08/B8unam.htm
*
Never mind that thousands died fighting for and against this doctrine, or burned at the stake, or enslaved and exterminated by Catholic colonizers who evangelized native peoples by force “for their own salvation.” I hope and pray that we have learned the lesson, and will not repeat the same mistakes “in defense of the faith.”
*
Going forward, with regard to the ordination of women to the priesthood and the episcopate, I hope and pray for a similar “re-formulation” that will recognize that the Church is “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic,” but not necessarily patriarchal. I am not trying to convince you of anything, just listen to my hopes and concerns, and if you think that I am being deceived by the devil, please pray for me, OK?

Posted by Celeste on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 6:18 PM (EDT):

To Gutierrez: You wrote:“there is no salvation outside the Church.” Well, now we know there is, and Vatican II came up with a deeper explanation of why people who do not belong to the Church can be saved. Some good people still have reservations about this “doctrinal change.”

God did not leave us orphan letting us figure out by ourselves (How many Christian denominations there are although they use the same Scripture when there is no authority to guide!). Instead, the Church guide us to all truth through Scripture, Sacred Tradition and Magisterium. If we deny the Church’s authority, there is confusion, a sure sign from the devil

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 5:09 PM (EDT):

Response to Amy - Agree, I am not infallible. But with all due respect, you are not infallible, Jimmy Akin is not infallible in his understanding of Church doctrine, and the CDF is not infallible when saying that the Pope is infallible when the Pope didn’t say he was. It is WRONG to assume that any doctrine is infallible as long as it has not been infallibly defined as such in past, present, and future tense. What is “definitive” in past and present tense should not be assumed to be “definitive” (let alone “infallible”) in future tense until the Lord returns. The door is closed, but not locked. Never say never… :-)

Posted by Kurt on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 5:08 PM (EDT):

Please remember folks, this is about the Pope’s decision to consider women in the diaconate, not the issue of women priests.

Posted by Amy on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 4:54 PM (EDT):

And neither are you infallible, Luis. You just want to dig your heels in. Jimmy Akin is presenting the teachings of the Church. If you are going to use the “infallible” argument then go ahead and say nothing is infallible and we can make up our own rules. That’s why we have we have a Magisterium so that we don’t make up our own rules.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 4:50 PM (EDT):

Response to Amy - Please… Jimmy Akin is not infallible… :-)

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 4:48 PM (EDT):

Response to Amy - Agree, Pope Francis says nothing to contradict Church teaching. But he does say that telling people they are not Catholic when they disagree or ask honest questions is *not Catholic*... read again:
*https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2016/06/09/thursday-proves-no-thing-slow-day-pope-francis/
*
I know what Pope Francis wrote in EG 104. Ordination is not an option for women at the moment. The “door is closed” (PRESENT TENSE). He has never said that the door will always remain closed (FUTURE TENSE), and no Pope has ever said that. Check it out :-)

@Luis - Pope Francis said nothing to contradict Church teaching in the Crux article. But he did say this:

“The reservation of the priesthood to males, as a sign of Christ the Spouse who gives himself in the Eucharist, is not a question open to discussion,” Francis wrote this in paragraph 104 of his apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium. He acknowledges women should have a role in the Church but this statement on an all-male priesthood has not changed even with Pope Francis. Ordination is not an option for women.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 4:32 PM (EDT):

Response to Pat - Based on the TOB, my understanding is that the fundamental unity of man and woman, in one and the same human nature (one and the same “flesh”), remains intact albeit in complementary “incarnations” to enable human beings to share the gift of love and the gift of life, and thereby become a communion of persons in the image of the Trinity. This is different from the patriarchal sex/gender “binary” in which complementarity is understood as mutual exclusion rather than mutual enrichment. Indeed, these fundamental issues of human sexuality must be reconsidered, in light of the signs of the times, seeking Christ’s will. Perhaps it is God’s will that only men can be priests, but we should not *assume* this to be the case, because 2000 years doing something does not automatically make it God’s will going forward. For this process of prayerful discernment, I think the TOB provides a good starting point.

Posted by Pat on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 4:15 PM (EDT):

What if: that whole “complemtarity” thing actually is true. That he really did intend to create two different, complementary sexes all along? So that when He created a helper for Adam, it was not just an accident that he created a woman. What if further - He actually willed for men to be priests? What if all the up to date social attitudes attempting to mold the church are actually contrary to the will of God?

May I suggest all of us stop this “discussion” with Luis. It will go no where. He is set in his beliefs, refuses to ascent to Catholic teaching and nothing you or I say can or will change it or he is just trolling for entertainment. Either way it’s a no-win situation.

Posted by Tim on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 3:35 PM (EDT):

Response to luis
Really ,not according to the teaching of the Catholic Church.

I am 100% Catholic.

I am not a cafeteria Catholic.

Tim

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 3:25 PM (EDT):

Response to Judy - Was the eternal Word a male before the incarnation? If not, then the masculinity of Jesus is incidental (not essential) for the redemption and the sacramental economy. If you think I am a heretic, I don’t take that personally, but respectfully disagree. We cannot confuse the limitations of human language with revealed truths. Is “God the Father” exclusively male? Of course not. Do we believe that the Trinity is 2/3 male and 1/3 sexless? Of course not. For further clarification, see the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church, sections 239, 370, 2779.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 3:12 PM (EDT):

Response to Celeste - Agree, “deepening” is a better way to describe doctrinal development, but sometimes it is hard to distinguish “deepening” from “changing.” I still remember when we were told that “there is no salvation outside the Church.” Well, now we know there is, and Vatican II came up with a deeper explanation of why people who do not belong to the Church can be saved. Some good people still have reservations about this “doctrinal change.”
*
In the case of the ordination of women to the priesthood, we need a deeper explanation of why a woman cannot be ordained, and I think the seeds for the required doctrinal development are contained in St John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, where he explains that “being a body” is more essential for the structure of the personal subject than being male or female. If you are interested, see JP2TB8 in the EWTN website, last paragraph in section 1:
*https://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/jp2tb8.htm
*
For more on my personal study of the TOB, see my notes, here:
*http://pelicanweb.org/CCC.TOB.html
*
I don’t presume this to be an authoritative analysis of the TOB, but it is my honest understanding, OK?

Posted by Judy on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 3:10 PM (EDT):

Jesus is SON of Almighty God and priest are men, called by Jesus. I was holding to call this individual “HERETIC” who called Jesus as man was incidental. We call priest father!!! What they would call priest after they make their own church with woman priest. Go confession saying “bless me Not father for I have sinned,,,?” “blesse me mother? ” “bless me WHAT? “

Be careful my friend, the era of the inquisition is over, and it could be that *you* are the one who is in danger of not being Catholic… :-)

Posted by Tim on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 2:43 PM (EDT):

If a women is ever ordained as a Priest in the Catholic Church, then it will no longer be the Catholic Church.

Posted by Celeste on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 2:42 PM (EDT):

To Gutierrez: I have to respond to this your assertion: You said: “our understanding of the deposit of faith” can change and that has happened “many times over the centuries”. Your statement is not true. If we study more, we will realize that our understanding gets deepened, but not become different in principle. Cardinal Newman wrote about seeming changes of doctrines. You can go to Sunday Visit and read this article. “The Development of Doctrine Is Catholic teaching a corruption of the “simple” Gospel?” Brendan Murphy OSV Newsweekly (https://www.osv.com/.../Story/.../The-Development-of-Doctrine.aspx)

We can compare the development of doctrines to the development of an egg becoming a bird. Although the appearance of different stages of development of a bird from an egg appear different, it is the same thing. So the each stage of the development of a doctrine looks different, it is the SAME IN PRINCIPLE as in the example given above. Please read cardinal Newman who was a very very intelligent convert.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 2:13 PM (EDT):

Response to Judy - May I remind you that Jesus came to heal the sick, not those who already consider themselves righteous and presume to already have full understanding of the truth. Your condescending attitude is an insult to any Catholic who is capable of using h** brain to study the scriptures, the tradition, and the teaching of the Church. This is for your consideration:
*https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2016/06/09/thursday-proves-no-thing-slow-day-pope-francis/
*
May I suggest you stop insulting those who are “in the hip of disorder,” and do your homework! According to Pope Francis, *you* may be a HERETIC!

Posted by Judy on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 12:47 PM (EDT):

Dear Celeste, we do not engage with the individual who is in the hip of disorder until they may, may recognize the disease they own. They do not listen to others, they do not have heart to be truthful. Their darkened intellect will justify everything in a way, the modernism fancied the confused human being, faith. Remember? If Eve ever ignored the voice of Satan, the world is a paradise now.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 1:16 AM (EDT):

Response to Celeste - “The Church confers the sacrament of Holy Orders only on baptized men (viri)whose suitability for the exercise of the ministry has been duly recognized.” Isn’t this a choice? Another choice would be: “The Church confers the sacrament of Holy Orders only on baptized persons whose suitability for the exercise of the ministry has been duly recognized.” The next sentence of CCC 1598 identifies who can make the choice. So it is a choice, not a dogma; and therefore, by the power of the keys, the choice can change as soon as a successor of Peter decides it is time. Bottom line: the Church is “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic” and by choice patriarchal, but can cease to be patriarchal and remain “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic.” Incidentally, the dogmatic definition on the institution of the sacramental priesthood (Trent, 1563) does *not* mention a masculinity requirement for apostolic succession. Check it out!

Posted by Celeste on Thursday, Jun, 9, 2016 12:43 AM (EDT):

“our Lord placed any limitations on the power of the keys” does not mean that the Church can change anything. For example, the Church will never change that God is love or is truth.

You also mentioned male priesthood is a choice. Yes, in the sense that man who desires to be ordained and is suitable. But No, in the sense that women can be ordained. Here is
CCC1598. The Church confers the sacrament of Holy Orders only on baptized men (viri), whose suitability for the exercise of the ministry has been duly recognized.

I will stop this discussion because i don’t have enough time. Thank you for responses. May God guide us to truth,

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 11:30 PM (EDT):

Response to Celeste - How do I know? Mt 16:19, 18:18. I don’t see that our Lord placed any limitations on the power of the keys. See also CCC 1577 and 1598. Dogmas don’t change, but doctrines can and do change. That the Church is “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic” is dogma. That the Church is, in addition, patriarchal, is not dogma. CCC 1577 is a doctrine that can change as soon as the Church decides that the reason given is not valid. CCC 1598 says that the male-only priesthood is a choice (first sentence) and who can make the choice (second sentence). Listening to Peter? Sure, but Peter has yet to infallibly define the male-only priesthood as a divinely revealed dogma, so listening is not the same as believing with certainty of faith.

Posted by Celeste on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 7:11 PM (EDT):

to Gutierrez: How do you know that the Church has the authority to ordain women? Then, does the Church have the authority to change the teaching on Trinity, too? Doctrines never change although disciplines do. Jesus teachings and actions are eternally true, and transcend the time of His earthly life. If ordaining women is His will, Jesus, who is radical in that He respected women against the custom, could choose women among twelve. I only remind you of Jesus word to Peter: “Whoever listens to you, listens to Me. Whoever rejects you rejects Me>”

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 3:32 PM (EDT):

Response to Amy et al - The deposit of faith does not change, but our understanding of the deposit of faith DOES CHANGE. Just compare the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church with older catechisms. St John Paul II’s Theology of the Body is another good example, specifically with regard to issues of theological anthropology. It is not that the deposit of faith changes, but our understanding deepens and extends to new horizons as the Church is confronted with new situations we had never encountered before. Else, what is the magisterium for?

Absolutely true. Scripture speaks of the Deacon Phoebe. Tradition tells us of women deacons in the early church. The Holy Father tells these good sisters that the matter they raise is worthy of research.

Certainly there are questions and various opinions faithful people can hold. But not Scripture, Tradition nor the Magisterium close this question of women in the diaconate. I applaud the Holy Father for not being afraid to have an open discussion on this matter rather than close off discussion as certain layperson demand. God bless him.

Posted by Amy on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 1:18 PM (EDT):

@Kurt - The Deposit of Faith is Scripture, Tradition and Magisterial Teaching. The examples you provided are not valid. And, once again, The Deposit of Faith is unchanging. Philosophical objections have no merit. Disciplines can change such as priestly celibacy but ordaining women cannot change. This is all I have to say on the matter. You can either accept what the Church teaches or reject it.

Posted by Kurt on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 12:01 PM (EDT):

@Amy, you might believe a discussion of women in the diaconate has no merit, but clearly the Holy Father thinks there is merit in such a study. There are many things these good sisters could pray for, including looking at new ways to serve the People of God.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 11:59 AM (EDT):

Response to Amy - Why is it that our understanding of the deposit of faith cannot change? It has changed many times over the centuries! Do we still believe that the end times is around the corner? Do we still believe that male circumcision is a prerequisite for baptism? Do we still believe that the earth is flat? Do we still believe that usury is a mortal sin? Do we still believe that slavery is part of “natural law”? Do we still believe that sex/gender is binary?

Posted by Amy on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 11:49 AM (EDT):

@ Luis - There is nothing wrong with discussion but when someone insists something can change when it cannot based on their own personal interpretation they need to be challenged. “The Catechism of the Catholic Church is a catechism promulgated for the Catholic Church by Pope John Paul II in 1992. It sums up, in book form, the beliefs of the Catholic faithful.” As St. John Paul II stated “Guarding the Deposit of Faith is the mission which the Lord entrusted to his Church.” I think this sums it up quite definitively.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 11:34 AM (EDT):

Response to Amy et al - Well, if sharing our personal understanding of the Catechism has no merit, then this forum is worthless. Simply repeating what the Catechism says does not add anything to our common understanding. If you really think that we have already exhausted all possible understanding of the deposit of faith, you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! The faith is always the same but the source of ever new light (Mt 13:52; FD 22). Your rigidity also reminds me of Einstein dictum, “Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.” As to my motivation for participating in this forum, could you kindly allow God to be my judge?

Posted by Amy on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 11:23 AM (EDT):

@Kurt - The reason why I said “he will” is because there is no other option. This is not meant to be an assumption or a guess. Because the discussion of women deacons was raised by women religious has absolutely no merit. Perhaps they need to pray for the grace of understanding and acceptance.

Posted by Kurt on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 11:13 AM (EDT):

@Amy, you write: ” I believe after this discussion he will…” You are certainly free to have your guesses as to what the conclusion of the future discussion will be just as others are free to have contrary guesses.

My guess is that this review will leave it unresolved. But the fact that the issue of women in the diaconate was respectfully raised by women religious and the Holy Father respectfully responded will trigger a longer term consideration of the possible pastoral benefits of women in the diaconate.

But, of course, we are all just making guesses.

Posted by Amy on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 11:05 AM (EDT):

@ Luis Gutierrez

I think 1577 from the Catechism states it quite clearly - Inserting your own understanding has no merit.

1577 “Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination.“66 The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry.67 The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. the Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.68

luis, you definitely like to “stir the pot” and draw attention to yourself. Many in the Catholic Church are done with individuals like you. They’ve seen and experienced the chaos, scandal and confusion that someone like you brings into the life of our Church - change, change and more change. Your babbling on is getting old and ridiculous. You might want to spend some time in prayer before the Blessed Sacrament - or is that something else you think should change. I will leave our future in God’s good hands - He’ll have the final say?

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 10:50 AM (EDT):

Response to Amy - The exclusively male priesthood is neither a matter of faith or a matter of morals. It is based on patriarchal gender theory, a legacy from patriarchal Israel that is no longer normative after the redemption. You can check this out in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1577 and 1598. These sections state what the Church does and why. As soon as the *why* is understood differently, the Church does have the authority, by the power of the keys (Mt 16:19, 18:18), to let go of the patriarchal priesthood. This is my faith, which is based on the redemption and the new covenant, not the old patriarchal covenant of Israel.

Posted by Amy on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 10:41 AM (EDT):

@ Luis - Yes, faith is what this issue is all about. The Catholic Church cannot change anything in the area of faith and morals. Pope Francis cannot change this and no future pope can change this. You may find this unreasonable but this is the teaching of the Church.

@Kurt - Pope Francis can call for a discussion but that is all it will be. I believe after this discussion he will make it clear once again that ordination is not possible for women.

Posted by Kurt on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 10:25 AM (EDT):

The authors of this article made a mistake. The Holy Father, to his great credit, acknowledged that a serious discussion of admitting women to the diaconate had merit. Sadly, and I think the opening paragraphs of this article sparked it, some folks can’t help themselves from bringing up their unrelation obsession with priestly ordination (which is not the topic) and their general displeasure with the world around them.

If the Holy Father can pull off a serious, focused study of women deacons, it would be a tremendous accomplishment, but I expect the folks who go flyng off the handle on other issues will dominate the discussion.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 10:24 AM (EDT):

Response to Amy - If this issue is not open to reason, something is wrong. Faith transcends reason but cannot be irrational.

Posted by Amy on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 10:21 AM (EDT):

@Russell Snow - You are to be commended for your faithfulness. You are correct in your understanding. The Catholic Church will not change in her position on women’s ordination. This is a closed issue!

I am sorry to say this but those of you who believe otherwise really do not know your faith. Wishing it were different is one thing but believing it can be different is something else entirely. All the “logical” conclusions you offer are irrelevant. The ordination of women is a closed issue. It will not and cannot be despite all of the reasons you propose why it should and will.

@ Hugh Davey - Vocations to religious life have only dwindled in the progressive communities that wanted to change things! Many of these progressive orders favored the ordination of women, did away with habits and preferred wearing “lay clothing”, preached LGBT acceptance and on and on. These orders are dying out. Women today who enter religious life want the “real deal”. They want to wear a habit and they want to be obedient to the teachings of the Church. These orders are bursting at the seams. Thank God! These women are joyful, and content to be obedient to the teachings of the Church.

@Robert - Deacons don’t have to give anything up? Quite the contrary. They are bound to celibacy if their wife dies. They give up time with their family to give to the Church in service. It is not always an easy balancing act to spread yourself between the Church and your family. They normally devote numerous hours of service weekly, attend workshops and retreats and continuing education classes.

I commend those of you have spoken up defending the teachings of the Church. Yes, Mother Angelica never backed down from the truth and neither should we.

Posted by Judy on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 9:29 AM (EDT):

God created man and woman! He liked them!
The pride of modernist Catholics make their own thoughts as of God’s.
Woman Jesus, Transgender Jesus! Woman priest, transgender priest!
.
I dare to think That degrading Jesus as not of him may to offending “The Holy Ghost” which is unforgivable!
.
As Benedict said they may at the point to loose the ability for redemption.

“How long will you straddle the issue?
If the LORD is God, follow him; if Baal, follow him.” (1 Kings 18)
.“Baal” today may be viewed as the spirit of the modern world, which is nothing other than the Culture of Death. This is a spirit which demands, among other things, that the God-given equality of men and women must be viewed as synonymous with identical in attributes, and interchangable, (like machine parts made on an assembly line) instead of equal in dignity, but complementary, with different gifts, talents, attributes, and roles to fulfill, yet each essential and irreplaceable in the order of things.

Posted by Pat on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 6:56 AM (EDT):

Tom:

Your point that women ought to be able to serve the church in whatever capacity they wish - illustrates exactly my point and the break between authentic Catholic and modern Catholic. People are to serve the church in the capacity that God wants them to serve, in the role that God called them to. Anything else is selfish and a power grab. It is not surprising to see that so prominently today - as it has become a mark of the 20th century church, pride, selfishness, etc.

God has a reason for male only priesthood, perhaps we know what it is, perhaps we don’t, but it doesn’t matter. We can think of it as every person is created with all the traits and talents to fill the role that God has for him or her, (scholar, musician, farmer, nurse…) - perhaps - the vocation (to whatever vocation) comes before the particulars of gender and personality, then these traits are fitted accordingly (i.e. male for priest, or deacon, or bishop)

Next, they’ll be trying to get the Church to change her official understanding of the Resurrection of Jesus. (“He was resurrected from the dead only in the sense that his disciples remembered him, and began to speak publicly about him.”) And other such rubbish.
.
Look. You’re either a Catholic, or you’re not. If you’re a Catholic, you believe what the Church believes and teaches. If you don’t believe as the Church believes, then you’ve moved into the area of some other faith, or perhaps of no faith at all.
.
Know who you are. Know where you are.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 1:16 AM (EDT):

Response to Celeste - Jesus Christ is God, and as God is timeless, but the Church is not. God comes to us where we are, not where we might be. His earthly mission was to the people of Israel. The Church’s mission is to the world. Precisely for this reason, he gave the Church the power of the keys, so the Church does have the authority to ordain women at any time; and he promised that the Church would do greater things than he had been able to do. See John 4:27, 16:12 for hints about why he chose 12 males during his public ministry, *before* the resurrection. But would Jesus, in today’s world, chose 12 males to represent the patriarchs of the 12 tribes of Israel? The ancient patriarchal culture of male headship is passing away, and our Risen Lord still has common sense!

Posted by Celeste on Wednesday, Jun, 8, 2016 1:03 AM (EDT):

to Gutierrez: The teaching of Jesus transcends the time and space. If He wants to ordain woman, why didn’t He do that? When Jesus did not ordain woman although He treated women equally when women were the second class, there must be a reason. Indeed, a priest represents Jesus. Also, Saint Pope JPII said that the case for woman ordination is closed (I am paraphrasing his teaching.) We Catholics should listen to the teaching of a successor of Peter, pope. Jesus said to Peter :” Whoever listens to you, listens to Me, whoever rejects you rejects Me.” Also, Jesus gave Peter the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. I hope and pray that Cafeteria Catholics (who pick and choose the teaching of the Church) know that they are rejecting Jesus, not accepting all the teaching of the Church.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 11:59 PM (EDT):

Response to Rosemarie Kury - Inviting people to leave the Church over any kind of disagreement strikes me as silly, among other things. End of subject? Are you serious? Speaking about “subjects,” the body is a sacrament of the entire person but is not the entire personal subject. When a priest consecrates the bread and wine, he or she is acting in the person of Christ as a divine personal subject, not just as a human being with a male body. End of subject? Please, do your homework!

Posted by Rosemarie kury on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 11:52 PM (EDT):

To Luis G. Many popes including Francis has said that woman ordinations will not be done. Again, the priest is acting in the place of Jesus in all thing. Jesus ordained the first priests, the Apostles and gave them the power to forgive sins in his name,and also the Eucharist. Mary was not included in this. A woman cannot do this. End of subject. You can believe what you want to but in this teaching it is infalliblle as Jesus instituted the sacraments. I suggest if you disagree with this, the Episcopalian church would welcome you, and God feel more at home there.

Posted by Tom on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 11:31 PM (EDT):

It is long past the time for the Church to be even debating this subject. If we agree that God created all humans as equals, it follows that women deserve an equal opportunity to serve the Church in whatever capacity they wish. The Church is the penultimate old boys club and can no longer continue to justify curtailing, opposing and preventing the right of women to serve as Deacons, priests, bishops and even as head of the Church. Welcome to the 21st century.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 11:11 PM (EDT):

Response to Judy - With all due respect, I believe that those who keep insisting that women “cannot” be ordained are the one who are deceiving themselves. NOTHING is impossible with God.

Posted by Judy on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 10:26 PM (EDT):

@Celeste, I believe that whoever insisting woman ordination deceiving themselves. They can talk all their logic with the modernist theory, at the end of day, they would like to see the Catholic church to go down as one of Protestant. They are under the thumb of Diobolical power. Remember what evil do to destroy The Holy Mother Church? 1. attack the Priesthood, 2, attack family, 3, attack the holy Eucharist. All those things are supported by the modernists in the church. They are in the church, yet, their soul is not in the church! Many saints and popes said that the mordenism is not for our church.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 9:35 PM (EDT):

Response to Robert Jacquart - Indeed, some nuns/sisters could become priests, just like some monks/brothers also become priests!

Posted by Robert Jacquart on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 9:26 PM (EDT):

Why not become nuns or Sisters, they lack vocations. I have never met a person Catholic or Protestant who doesn’t want to preach the word of God. I have seen Priests and Deacons use that power in the wrong way but and at times if they didn’t I would be surprised because if they didn’t then they wouldn’t be human. I find it funny that the majority of Christians today who preach the word of God, including the Deacons in our church, don’t have to give anything up, they can be married, have materialism. But a Catholic priest receive their income from the church, really is consecrated to the church. I like the Saints they didn’t they seek position or power and nothing was below them. Mother Teresa cleaned the toilets, they did the chores for there neighbors just the teach them the Catholic faith. Read the “Imitation of Christ” by Thomas A. Kempis.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 7:59 PM (EDT):

Response to Celeste - Of course we can serve Christ and the Church wherever we are. Does that mean we don’t needs ordained priests? And if we do, why only male ones? Should we assume that all male priests went to seminary seeking clerical power? That would be like assuming that all priestly vocations are hypocritical. Why should we assume then that all females seeking ordination are only looking for clerical power?

Posted by Celeste on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 6:34 PM (EDT):

To Gutierrez: If serving others is the main focus for a Christian, can’t we serve people where ever we are? I feel that people insisting on the ordination of women are more interested in the exercise of power as a priest. Otherwise, women ordination would not be such an important issue than serving others.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 5:31 PM (EDT):

Response to Celeste - There would not be any problem with women serving others as priests either. This is not about women seeking clerical power, just as it is not about men seeking clerical power. Those who seek clerical power, men or women, do not have a real vocation. It is precisely the women who are *not* seeking clerical power who should be tested for vocation to sacramental ministry. I believe in my heart that Christ wants to call many such women to serve the Church in the 21st century, and would rejoice if the Church allows him to do so. The Church retains the power to test all vocations. Let’s give our Lord a chance to call those he wants, here and now, without limiting him to patriarchal boundaries!

Posted by Celeste on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 5:19 PM (EDT):

I wonder whether people support women ordination perceive priesthood as mainly power grab rather than service for God’s people. If they perceived it as the latter, there would not be any problem with serving others as a layperson.

Posted by Amy on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 4:07 PM (EDT):

@BC The Catholic Church does not have a ministry for a “Deaconess”. Something is missing from this story.

Posted by BC in AZ on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 4:00 PM (EDT):

The bishop imposed his hands on the deaconess… but it’s not ordination. The prayers refer to the deaconesses’ ministry… but it’s not ordination. The deaconess receives a stoles… but, we swear, it’s not ordination.

Posted by Kurt on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 1:58 PM (EDT):

A deacon is an ordinary minister of Holy Communion. One advantage of ordaining more women and men as deacons would be that they could serve as ordinary Ministers of Communion rather than relying on extraordinary.

Posted by Wendy Gardner on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 1:34 PM (EDT):

Semi off-topic, but I have heard, as we all have, about married English Anglicans being admitted to the RC Priesthood. I wasn’t really thinking much about that until I read recently about a new RC Priest taking up his duties at a parish and he introduced himself to the congregation, and then introduced to them his wife. All I could think of then was that the people in the pews were probably thinking two things: “How do I explain this to my kids, after defending priestly celibacy for years?”, and “Is this the Church turning up the water temperature slowly on us frogs in the pews to accept married priests?”
“I will not serve, unless I can do it my way” , posts Pat above. That made me remember when people first started clamoring for woman priests that the best candidates for that were the old-time nuns who had no desire to become priests.
Remember the feminists saying that if men could become pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament? Well, that’s what people are really nervous about with women priests. It’s the quality of the women we see wanting this as well as church teaching. One often gets the idea that the Nuns on the Bus might want to throw Catholic teaching under it.

Posted by Amy on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 1:20 PM (EDT):

@Richard - You did not have a female Deacon in Arkansas because it would have been an invalid ordination.

Posted by Jerry Nieblas on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 1:15 PM (EDT):

dan and luis, Isn’t there any episcopal church near you - one that would make you both happy? Maybe you two would be happy “founding that new church” that dan mentioned in his comment - you’d probably eventually want to change that though! You both sound angry and unhappy - esp. dan. You both seem the type that would change the changes… just for the sake of changing. Take a breath and think about the great things the Catholic Church gifts to us - slow down and appreciate them. The Catholic world is getting pretty fed up with the “change” word.

Posted by Richard Cellette on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 1:15 PM (EDT):

When I lived in Arkansas we had a woman deacon and it was a blessing to have her. The shortage of priest and Catholic churches in the state means a parish priest has to cover several parishes and when we couldn’t have a proper Mass at least we could have a communion service.

Posted by Amy on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 1:13 PM (EDT):

@Hugh - Vocations to traditional orders are booming. These young women have chosen to wear a habit and do God’s work in a traditional way. The religious orders that made a decision to be progressive are dying out. They do not have vocations.

Posted by hugh davey on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 1:09 PM (EDT):

Why is it that the vocations to the religious life has dwindled over the years if so many women want to serve THE LORD or do they not see this role to be worthy of them.I know and have friends who are NUNS and they have been a great inspiration to me through the years ...in fact it was these SISTERS OF MERCY who were by my side through the early part of my life tell me..how can men and women be equal..I CANT GIVE BIRTH AND MY WIFE CANT INPREGNATE HERSELF ..... this was never GODS PLAN

Posted by Pat on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 12:38 PM (EDT):

I have observed before, So many different roles and tasks to be filled in ministering and building up the kingdom of God. The lofty and the mundane, the celebrated and the hidden, and God always calls people to fill those roles. The problem is when people don’t want to do the role God has called them to and aspire for something they were not intended to have (priesthood for instance). “I will not serve, unless I can do it my way” Imagine Our Lady answering the archangel with something like “I can’t, I’m starting my marketing degree in the fall, then I plan to intern for a few years…I’d be a much better executive than I would a mother, and I’d be better Pope than Peter “

Posted by Amy on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 12:36 PM (EDT):

All of this talk about the ordination of women seems to be a never-ending discussion. This endless debate about the justice of this issue is, frankly, exhausting. Pope Francis was probably “put in a corner” when asked the question about women deacons. He is not exactly the best at adlibbing. Furthermore, this idea that it was because of the time in history that only men were called by Jesus is ludicrous. Jesus was not bound by place or time. He could have called anyone and he called men to ordination. Obedience is a virtue as is humility. Take a look at the Protestant churches that have decided to make changes. Many of them fall short of even representing Christian teaching. The Catholic Church stands for continuity not bound by society’s expectations. Let’s be grateful for it.

Posted by russell snow on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 12:34 PM (EDT):

i was in an Episcopal seminary when the issue of women’s ordination of deacons heated up and the proponents claimed it would not lead to the ordination of women as priests. My Bishop opposed it but when the General Convention (the highest authority) voted to ordain women deacons as priests he felt he had no choice. I felt that only the whole Catholic Church could decide the issue in a council. Anglo-Catholics had a branch theory of the Catholic Church. This revealed to me that the Episcopal not Catholic at all was essentially Protestant as the 1928 Prayer Book stated. I did not become ordained and eventually I became a Catholic. I told everyone who said the Catholics would soon do it that it would never happen. I am sure it will not.

Posted by Donald Link on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 11:36 AM (EDT):

It would seem that before proceeding further on the issue, it would be useful to get some authentic historical perspective. I have yet to see a definitive presentation of what roles deaconesses played in the past, what period of time they existed and how they were confirmed in office. Until all of this is done, the various proposals appear to be more of pushing a particular political point of view. As far as Pope Francis, we all know that he leaves considerable room to maneuver and may simply decide not to decide.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 10:54 AM (EDT):

Response to David - Disobedience? I don’t know of any prohibition for lay people to discuss the issue.

Posted by David on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 10:43 AM (EDT):

Luis Gutierrez, from Ordinatio Sacerdotalis:
Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.

Continuing to argue for “women’s ordination” is an act of disobedience, my friend.

Posted by Kurt on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 10:23 AM (EDT):

It will be interesting to further study the issue of women as deacons, even if there is not a decision to restore this practice. The article however, makes a mistake by focusing to much on what liturgical role women deacons performed. Doing so is to project back a later understanding of the diaconate in which it was mostly reduced to a liturgical function. In the early church, the diaconate was not much of a liturgical ministry. The ministry was primarily to do exactly the pastoral things that it notes women deacons did.

One advantage of resuming the ordination of women to the diaconate is that it could also help restore the office to the purpose and role it had in the early church rather than a liturgical assistant.

Posted by michael coco on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 8:29 AM (EDT):

How much longer Lord!

Posted by Ronk on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 4:07 AM (EDT):

Dan, your ignorance is hilarious. Mohommadanism was not even invented until 600 years after our Lord founded His Catholic Church on His Apostles who like him were celibate men. There were many, many priestesses in His day, and they survived quite well. He very deliberately chose not to emulate the pagan idea of priestessess for His Church.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, Jun, 7, 2016 12:17 AM (EDT):

Response to Rosemarie Kury - Your line of reasoning is based on patriarchal gender theory, which effectively reduces both men and women to sex objects. The Theology of the Body clearly explains that human beings are personal subjects, not just sex objects with male or female bodies. It clearly explains that the bridegroom-bride analogy in Ephesians 5:21-33 should not be interpreted literally according to the patriarchal cultural context in which it was written. When the priest acts in the person of Christ, he or she is acting in place of a divine personal subject, not just a human being with a male body.

Posted by Dan on Monday, Jun, 6, 2016 10:14 PM (EDT):

Jesus chose men because of the time and place….if you notice, he did not choose women because of how women were treated in the Middle East. A woman on her own would NOT have been listened to, and probably would have been molested and murdered, just as she would be TODAY in Saudi Arabia or most if not all Muslim-dominated hellholes.
Jesus never said that women were less than men, and He did not create a caste of celibate untouchables to do His work. The Church has been wrong about women for thousands of years, and the perverts who control the Church will never give up their power. Never.
We are better off if we found a new Church, one that is more like Christ and less like a cabal of perverts who are channeling the dark ages….

Posted by Jerry Nieblas on Monday, Jun, 6, 2016 9:11 PM (EDT):

luis gutierrez, There’s always the episcopal church. Positive they would welcome you and your way of thinking.

Posted by Judy on Monday, Jun, 6, 2016 8:25 PM (EDT):

.
“O Lord, I am Your servant; I am Your servant, and the son of Your handmaid;
You have broken my bones; to You I will offer a sacrifice of praise, and I will call upon the name of the Lord”
.
This is Hellel psalm, which Jesus sang at the Last Supper in Thanksgiving after the first mass.
.
Is hat sounds like ok by woman at the altar?
.
Remember dear late Mother Angelica, the wrath she showed to the entire world, specially, liberal catholics when she learned A woman got the roll as Jesus at the Calvery in Denver?
.
God never makes mistake, he made woman and man! If you have problem with it, your the basic being is in trouble. Everybody ought to live the way God created! You don’t challenge God, only evil do! At least the evil knows, he never win!

Posted by John on Monday, Jun, 6, 2016 7:21 PM (EDT):

The Lord Jesus chose men to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.

Posted by mike on Monday, Jun, 6, 2016 6:07 PM (EDT):

There is absolutely no logical reason why women should not be priests. The reasons often put forth to argue against women priests are lame and more lame. Think of how much the church is missing without the voice of women added to the voice of men at its highest levels. An all male clergy is severely limiting and narrow. How much better to have the voice of the female added to the church decision making process. But I guess it’s human nature to hold on to one’s power and I don’t see the old men at the vatican sharing theirs any time soon. Pity.

Posted by Rosemarie kury on Monday, Jun, 6, 2016 5:46 PM (EDT):

Here’s why not women deacons or priests. The priest represents Jesus and the Church the bridegroom. Furthermore as to priests, Jesus surely would have ordained Mary and Mary of Magdalene if women priests were feasible. A woman cannot take the place of Jesus, and why is that do difficult to understand! Women now serve as EM ministers and lectors. Girls serve as altar servers. Women now are essentially doing the work of early deaconesses. Many bring Communion to the I
Housebound and to nursing homes. Women frequently launder linens and serve as sacristan S. They volunteer and teach CCD classes and Catholic schools. To say that women are not active in the Church is ridiculous. Deacons baptize and assist the priest at Mass, read the Gospels and give homilies. For the most part before they’re ordained and go through vigorous training in theology for several years. If one is unhappy with this, there are many Protestant churches where women are priests and ministers. I’m sure they’d welcome anyone unhappy with the Magestrium decision.

Posted by Luis Gutierrez on Tuesday, May, 31, 2016 1:19 AM (EDT):

Clearing the air will not be possible until we have women deacons, women priests, and women bishops. Why not? This entire issue is about whether or not all men and women share one and the same human nature assumed by the eternal Word at the incarnation, even though human bodies are male or female or intersex. The eternally begotten Word was not a male before the incarnation. Therefore, for the redemption and the sacramental economy, the bodily masculinity of Jesus is as incidental as the color of his eyes. The body is a sacrament of the entire person but is not the entire personal subject. When a priest consecrates the bread and wine, he or she is acting in the person of Christ as a *divine personal subject,* not just as a human being with a male body.

Join the Discussion

We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words.
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines.
Comments are published at our discretion. We won't publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words.
Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.